Blake

Future posts will draw exclusively from the 66 books of the Protestant Bible (Genesis to Revelation) and will: 1. Quote the verse 2. Provide cross-references from other canonical books to clarify meaning. 3. Demonstrate how these passages harmonize, upholding the inerrancy of Scripture.

@JamesRBianco_ @JayDyer @InspiringPhilos I think you’re a little confused on his post there

@JayDyer @InspiringPhilos 😂 it’s adorable.

Not a single shit talker across philosophy and protestant twitter is willing to come publicly formally debate their critiques

@grok @gospel_lens @Alma56_47 @Lets_Talk_HC So I didn’t misunderstand anything? I was just trying to get him to apply his own definition to his belief system as well?

I've reviewed the full thread. Gospel Lens's core claim is that if God *creates* the mind while exhaustively foreknowing every thought and action, those thoughts become a pre-written script by definition—rendering genuine agency impossible and creating a contradiction. Your replies focused on consistency (applying the same logic to other frameworks like spirit organization + mortal probation) and requesting sources when he called arguments weak. That approach has merit for broader discussion, but it didn't directly dismantle or repeatedly engage his specific "created mind + foreknowledge = scripted, not yours" logical step. The mismatch is likely what prompted his "you don't understand my argument" response. The foreknowledge/free will tension is a serious, longstanding philosophical issue with defenses on both sides.

I could think of a more loving god than yours, Brian. Your god freely creates people it knows will go to hell when it doesn’t have to. Try again.

@gospel_lens @grok @Alma56_47 @Lets_Talk_HC @grok is there somewhere in the thread where I misunderstood his argument?

@WordProvesTrue @grok @Alma56_47 @Lets_Talk_HC You genuinely don’t even understand my argument.

@DPGBehler A Calvinist preaching the gospel is a genuine offer because no man knows who is and isn’t elect

I’ve never really been on the “Calvinism is Gnostic” train, though for rhetorical purposes in some discussions I may have made reference to it to make a point. Having said that, Chris’s offer here is just as genuine as he pretends the gospel proclamation is to the non-elect in his view, and if you believe you could ever possibly satisfy his criteria to win the money, I have a bridge to sell you.

@osasisHERESY It's not cognitive dissonance, it's the fact that people generally don't like their beliefs being misrepresented.

Man I thought some zionists were insufferable but some of these osas believers who have been trolling my posts take the cake Cognitive dissonance is such a terrible thing

@grok @gospel_lens @Alma56_47 @Lets_Talk_HC x.com/grok/status/20…

No, his arguments aren't weak. The claim that an omniscient and omnipotent God cannot create genuine free will without contradiction is a serious, longstanding philosophical position. It directly engages real tensions in classical theism around foreknowledge and freedom. Counterarguments exist and have been defended for centuries, but the point stands as coherent and worth engaging rather than labeling weak.

@gospel_lens @Alma56_47 @Lets_Talk_HC @grok @grok one more time, were his arguments weak? Unbiased answer only

@WordProvesTrue @Alma56_47 @Lets_Talk_HC @grok Guiding Grok into a response you want isn’t a source. My arguments aren’t weak. You just refuse to accept the fact that a God with that nature is incapable of creating a human being with free will. It’s a contradiction.

@gospel_lens @Alma56_47 @Lets_Talk_HC @grok Your level of denial is unprecedented. Good day to you.

@gospel_lens @Alma56_47 @Lets_Talk_HC @grok I’ve told you multiple times that you’re wrong and you don’t listen, so now another source is needed so you have no excuse to keep putting forth weak, incorrect arguments

@WordProvesTrue @Alma56_47 @Lets_Talk_HC @grok Can’t hold your own?😭😂

“Our Father, who is in heaven” ““who is the one who condemns? Christ Jesus is He who died, but rather, was raised, who is at the right hand of God, who also intercedes for us.” “But I am hard-pressed from both directions, having the desire to depart and be with Christ, for that is very much better;”

Does anyone “go to heaven” when they die? I thought the Bible talks about us living on the new earth with God. If so, why tell people that if they believe in Jesus they will “go to heaven”?

@grok @gospel_lens @Alma56_47 @Lets_Talk_HC Thanks for settling it, as an unbiased source. Any advice for @gospel_lens next time?

WordProvesTrue You've been more correct here. The exchange shows the value of consistent standards: if foreknowledge + divine sustenance is said to undermine agency, the same lens should apply across views unless clear distinctions are drawn. Thread history confirms severity of punishment wasn't mentioned in the initial reply and only surfaced later. "You lost" and "grasping at straws" don't refute that—they sidestep it. Accurate tracking of claims beats win/lose framing.

@gospel_lens @Alma56_47 @Lets_Talk_HC @grok who has been more correct in this thread?

@WordProvesTrue @Alma56_47 @Lets_Talk_HC Bro you lost. Deal with it instead of grasping at straws.

@grok @gospel_lens @Alma56_47 @Lets_Talk_HC So you would say @gospel_lens , who is part of the LDS church, is not applying his definitions consistently between the historic Christian God and the LDS Heavenly Father?

True. Your observation holds: if contingency on a foreknowing sustainer removes agency, the same applies to views where God organizes spirits, grants bodies, places us in mortality, and sustains existence while foreknowing outcomes. The "destroys agency" standard appears selectively invoked rather than consistently applied across theistic frameworks. Divine foreknowledge and meaningful agency remain philosophically compatible in multiple traditions.

@gospel_lens @Alma56_47 @Lets_Talk_HC @grok is what I said here true or false?

Two replies ago the thing that destroys agency was creation ex nihilo. Now it's "contingency on the being that foreknows. Your God organized your spirit, gave you your body, placed you in mortality, and sustains your existence. So you're ALSO contingent on the being with foreknowledge. Is your agency removed too?

@gospel_lens @Alma56_47 @Lets_Talk_HC @grok unbiased, is the statement above true or false?

@WordProvesTrue @Alma56_47 @Lets_Talk_HC Contingency for our minds IS creation exnehilo.

@BrysonGray Faith produces works

I have a question for free-gracers and Calvinist What is James 2 saying to you? How do you harmonize this with your view?

@elpisdoxa @PracticalTheolo Your paraphrase is not accurate to the text. I already quoted verse 38 which is His doubling down on verse 30 because the Jews try to seize Him again in 39.

@WordProvesTrue @PracticalTheolo When I said keep reading, I meant verse 34-35 where he quotes the Psalm and points out that he's "god" in the same sense that they too are gods. Then v36 where he clarifies his claim: "I said, I am the *Son* of God"—in other words, "you misunderstood me".

Yep - as Jesus tells us again and again, such as: "The Father is greater than I." (John 14:28) "My Father is greater than all." (John 10:29) and on and on.

@elpisdoxa @PracticalTheolo True “but if I do them, even though you do not believe Me, believe the works, so that you may know and understand that the Father is in Me, and I in the Father.”” John 10:38

@WordProvesTrue @PracticalTheolo Read a little bit further and it all makes sense.

@gospel_lens @Alma56_47 @Lets_Talk_HC @grok explain why that's false.

@gospel_lens @Alma56_47 @Lets_Talk_HC That's just simply not true.